By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Help! Convince me not to buy a very cheap and sexy 360! >_< Save my wallet!

J_Allard on 28 February 2013
Sal.Paradise said:
J_Allard said:
Bitfreak said:
 

PS+ games have never been advertised as free, they're just one of the perks or an 'Instant game collection' as SONY calls it for a subscription which has been clearly advertised as such.


Took me all of 2 seconds to Google "PS+ free games" and see PS blog results where Sony does in fact say the games are free.

I believe the company line is "Free for PS+ members" ie. free after you have already payed the PS+ subscription. Which is accurate. 

The morale of the story was that yes, Sony does in fact advertise them as free.

And of course its accurate. Just like if I were to say online play is absolutely free on 360 (as long as you're a Gold subscriber) that's accurate as well.

Wildly misleading and irrelevant, but accurate I guess. Either way it's no big deal to me, I just saw someone say Sony never advertises them as free games and thought I would correct that person.



Around the Network
Sal.Paradise on 28 February 2013
J_Allard said:
Sal.Paradise said:
J_Allard said:
Bitfreak said:
 

PS+ games have never been advertised as free, they're just one of the perks or an 'Instant game collection' as SONY calls it for a subscription which has been clearly advertised as such.


Took me all of 2 seconds to Google "PS+ free games" and see PS blog results where Sony does in fact say the games are free.

I believe the company line is "Free for PS+ members" ie. free after you have already payed the PS+ subscription. Which is accurate. 

The morale of the story was that yes, Sony does in fact advertise them as free.

And of course its accurate. Just like if I were to say online play is absolutely free on 360 (as long as you're a Gold subscriber) that's accurate as well.

Wildly misleading and irrelevant, but accurate I guess. Either way it's no big deal to me, I just saw someone say Sony never advertises them as free games and thought I would correct that person.

No, not wildly misleading or 'irrelevant'. "Free for PS+ members" means exactly what you or anybody else would think it does, as would "Free for XBL Gold members". I don't see how it can be interpreted in any other way than what it means.

Maybe one could misinterpret it if one is an idiot, but that's not Sony's fault.

And if one was an idiot lets say, and one did misinterpret it, one would quickly find in the process of accessing these games that being a PS+ member requires one paying for a subscription, so one could not 'accidentally' pay money for what one assumed was free. It's an absolute non-issue. But you have an axe to grind, I understand that. 



dahuman on 28 February 2013

If you must buy something new at a cheap price then just wait for an even bigger PS3 price drop, 360 is not worth it if you don't want Gold, but then you'd be paying a lot more than 180 with Gold, it's not for the price sensitive consumers in the long run TBH. Also no, I'm not a PS+ member and never will be so PS3 is clearly a better deal overall.



J_Allard on 28 February 2013
Sal.Paradise said:

No, not wildly misleading or 'irrelevant'. "Free for PS+ members" means exactly what you or anybody else would think it does, as would "Free for XBL Gold members". I don't see how it can be interpreted in any other way than what it means.

Maybe one could misinterpret it if one is an idiot, but that's not Sony's fault.

And if one was an idiot lets say, and one did misinterpret it, one would quickly find in the process of accessing these games that being a PS+ member requires one paying for a subscription, so one could not 'accidentally' pay money for what one assumed was free. It's an absolute non-issue. But you have an axe to grind, I understand that. 


Your tangent is cool bro but again, someone made a comment that was wrong and I corrected them. Nowhere did I say Sony should reword how they describe the games. And yeah, per the context of the discussion and my reply, it is 100% irrelevant. I hope that helps.

OP has posted his decision here so feel free to keep arguing :)



Sal.Paradise on 28 February 2013
J_Allard said:
Sal.Paradise said:
 

No, not wildly misleading or 'irrelevant'. "Free for PS+ members" means exactly what you or anybody else would think it does, as would "Free for XBL Gold members". I don't see how it can be interpreted in any other way than what it means.

Maybe one could misinterpret it if one is an idiot, but that's not Sony's fault.

And if one was an idiot lets say, and one did misinterpret it, one would quickly find in the process of accessing these games that being a PS+ member requires one paying for a subscription, so one could not 'accidentally' pay money for what one assumed was free. It's an absolute non-issue. But you have an axe to grind, I understand that. 


Your tangent is cool bro but again, someone made a comment that was wrong and I corrected them. Nowhere did I say Sony should reword how they describe the games. And yeah, per the context of the discussion and my reply, it is 100% irrelevant. I hope that helps.

OP has posted his decision here so feel free to keep arguing :)

Oh, I thought "Wildly misleading and irrelevant" was in regards to Sony's company line I mentioned, you were actually talking about my comment. Thanks. My mistake and I apologize. 



Around the Network
ThatGreekGuy on 28 February 2013
cuberandgamer said:
bananaking21 said:
well look at it this way, you will be paying for live for atleast a year, thats another 50 bucks to your 180$, add another 50 bucks for every year you want live with it.


live actually cost $60

PS+ cost $50


Live= Makes you pay 60$ to play online for a system you bought

Plus= Optional pay for 50$ which gives you free games



Barozi on 28 February 2013
forest-spirit said:
Thanks for the input guys. I'll hold off for now and wait for a better bundle or a price cut (or another impulse). But knowing that you can get a new shiny 360 with a new shiny game for this price I'll keep my eyes on the 360 hardware section in case a more interesting deal shows up.

I guess the 4GB model is an option but from what I understand you can't use an external hard drive for saves and games?

you can use flash drives to increase the space by 32GB.



ROBOTECHHEAVEN on 28 February 2013

It amazes me to think people still think you need Xbox live gold to play online, for the most part it's true. But there are some games you don't need it and that's a fact . Ff11: online is a game that only a silver account is needed to access it. Gold is needed for online play like in cod and halo, plus using Netflix and stuff like that, but not for the Xbox arcade store .



GAMERTAG IS ANIMEHEAVEN X23

PSN ID IS : ANIMEREALM 

PROUD MEMBER OF THE RPG FAN CLUB THREAD

ALL-TIME FAVORITE JRPG IS : LOST ODYSSEY

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=52882&page=1

Nsanity on 28 February 2013
ThatGreekGuy said:
cuberandgamer said:
bananaking21 said:
well look at it this way, you will be paying for live for atleast a year, thats another 50 bucks to your 180$, add another 50 bucks for every year you want live with it.


live actually cost $60

PS+ cost $50


Live= Makes you pay 60$ to play online for a system you bought

Plus= Optional pay for 50$ which gives you free games

Your only renting those game.



ThatGreekGuy on 28 February 2013
Nsanity said:
ThatGreekGuy said:
cuberandgamer said:
bananaking21 said:
well look at it this way, you will be paying for live for atleast a year, thats another 50 bucks to your 180$, add another 50 bucks for every year you want live with it.


live actually cost $60

PS+ cost $50


Live= Makes you pay 60$ to play online for a system you bought

Plus= Optional pay for 50$ which gives you free games

Your only renting those game.

It's better than having to pay online.